A bulky lens on a tiny body, that's how you kill the primary purpose of mirrorless.

I don't give a dam about DR(current 5D III & 1D X are fine), I bought A7 for one reason: 35mm sensor in tiny body so I can carry around.

Metabones EF adapter will be tons of fun, but portable FF still would be my main reason for buying A7/A7r as well. It's always awkward and a pain to bring my 5D III with a couple of L glass to non-paid, "casual" events/outings. The EOS-M is good, but in the end, it really is no FF, esp. in low-light indoor setting.

My bone with Sony A7r is how large that Zeiss 55 f/1.8 is, far from pocketable, not to mention the $1000 price. That 35 f/2.8 size would be more to my liking, but f/2.8?? I'm not married to Zeiss and would rather see a compact 35 to 50 mm fast prime with AF for A7 from Sony, or better yet somebody like Sigma, at more like $500, which is where the Sony A-mount 50 f/1.4 goes for.. Sigma ART FE 35 f/1.4, anybody?

Is everything about scoring highest on a few select parameters on a gear test site?

No, but you seem to think so since you apparently need to try to cover up if any particular aspect of a Canon is not as good. I mean you were the one who wasn't talking about the overall system or the UI or any of that but tried to imply Canon has been making huge and general strides with each model in terms of the sensor and that the sensors are state of the art for detail and DR and color sensitivity.

[quote What about the rest of the system,[/quote]

I don't know, but you were not talking about the rest of the system in the message that we were all countering.

Quote

from the option to switch to a smaller raw file size

Which isn't really a true RAW and is not all that small for the number of MP it delivers and is useless for maximizing reach without wasting space storing garbage outer areas of the frame. Honestly, I'd rather have the crop options the other brands allow. Full quality cropped RAWs so you retain full everything for reach but don't waste space on excess around the frame edges when you are shooting in distance limited scenarios.

Quote

to certain unique lenses

Yes they do but what does that have to do with your claims that Canon has been making big strides with each body release in terms of MP,DR, color sensitivity when they have not improved any of that for well over half a decade and have gone backwards in terms of color sensitibity? With your making it sound like Canon is right there at the top for DR, MP, color? What else do we expect you to mean you brag on about how Canon is amazing for DR, resolution and color in response seeming to try to counter that Canon sensors are behind?

Quote

to color when photographing humans (not test charts)?

Not every shot has to be of either a typical Caucasian face or of a test chart.

Quote

How is it that some people find a car to be excellent for their needs when it doesn't have the biggest engine, fastest acceleration, heaviest towing capacity, shortest braking, highest headroom, etc.?

Nobody said it wasn't. You started off by claiming that a Toyota Camry has a more powerful engine than a Ferrari F1 car. Sure the Toyota may be fine for most and better for most even but it sure doesn't have a less powerful engine.

Quote

How can anyone be happy with a car that isn't the absolute best in the world in every parameter we choose to measure?

I think we can. I'm not sure you can since you seemed unwilling to admit that any parameter on your equipment might not be the best and when you did you then insisted that the difference could never matter to anyone in any scenario unless they were some slobbering test chart reader. You basically made it sound like any competent photographer, any 'real' photographer would never care. Don't toss rocks if you live in a glass house.

No need to get rid of all your Canon glass, with an adaptor for the Sony you could keep using them and save yourself A LOT of money. That Sony/Zeiss glass is even more overpriced than Canon glass !

Putting an adapter + L lens(es) on A7 or A7R would kill the primary purpose of mirrorless. You might as well stay with Canon DSLR + L lenses.

How?

It means you finally Exmor DR for shooting and you don't have to sell Canon glass and try to buy Nikon lenses.

A bulky lens on a tiny body, that's how you kill the primary purpose of mirrorless.

I don't give a dam about DR(current 5D III & 1D X are fine), I bought A7 for one reason: 35mm sensor in tiny body so I can carry around.

Well it all depends upon what your primary purpose for mirror less is. For a Canon user it changes the mount difference in a way that allows one to use Canon lenses on a superb low ISO sensor and that may be the primary interest that this is mirrorless for some.

My bone with Sony A7r is how large that Zeiss 55 f/1.8 is, far from pocketable, not to mention the $1000 price. That 35 f/2.8 size would be more to my liking, but f/2.8?? I'm not married to Zeiss and would rather see a compact 35 to 50 mm fast prime with AF for A7 from Sony, or better yet somebody like Sigma, at more like $500, which is where the Sony A-mount 50 f/1.4 goes for.. Sigma ART FE 35 f/1.4, anybody?

The reasonably small and fast lens already exists at 35mm, but unfortunately it's fixed to the front of the RX1/RX1R. Maybe Sony will see the light and release it as an E-mount 35/2 for the A7.

Unfortunately, AF causes lenses to be bigger. My MF Olympus (full frame) SLR lenses are tiny compared to AF Canon SLR lenses. MF Leica lenses will continue to be tiny compared to Sony's AF lenses for the A7. For those happy with MF, I would be surprised if Voigtlander missed the opportunity to release E mount versions of their M glass.

Canon's sensor tech is fine, but there is certainly not a consensus that it's the best(at least outside of this forum.)I have been very interested in the M9 for a long time, but for a plethora of reasons it was a no go for me.The sensor tech of Sony has been much hyped since the D800/D600 and I'm extremely pleased to have an extremely modern 24mp sensor, with focus peaking, in a size smaller than any other FF camera on the market.While this is not going to replace a DSLR for professional use in many cases, I think it will be a huge hit among enthusiasts(and pros) who want a fun camera to travel with or carry around everyday.As others have noted earlier, you can just buy this camera and use it with your Canon EF lenses, along with other lenses you might have around too(or any other lens you'd want to buy.)For anyone criticizing this camera, remember this, it features the most modern sensor available at the lowest price available for a FF, all in the smallest size of any FF camera on the market(besides RX1.)If you don't like it, you certainly don't need to buy it, but I find this camera to be MUCH more exciting than any other camera i've seen in a long, long while.

I wait for sony to bring an A9 in spring 2014. Sensor with 36 MP and on-sensor PDAF powerful enough to drive tracking AF at 8fps. Plus 5-axis in-body stabilizer. Priced below 3k. That will make me switch. I am amateur enthusiast. I want to deal with only one camera system at a time. I want the camera to be as small and light as possible, so i can go really go light when no heavy lens is required. Street, travel, city, mountaineering. And fast enough to track moving subjects and get some action as well.

I never use manual focus. Been there, done that last century, won't ever go back. :-)I want "AF-only" lenses without any manual focus facility. Make 'em lighter, smaller, better weathersealed (IP67) optically decent and keep prices reasonable.My preferred setup would be 3 tiny pancakes - a 20/4.0, a 40/2.0 and a 85/2.0. all with super fast and precise ring-USM. None of them more expensive than € 300. i don't care for zeiss labels on grossly overpriced sony lenses. 800 bucks for a slow 35/2.8 and 1000 for a 55/1.8? they gotta be joking!

My idea is more along the lines of the canon EF 40/2.8. small, light, optically good enough for 36 MP ... at 170 euro. :-)

Is everything about scoring highest on a few select parameters on a gear test site?

No, but you seem to think so since you apparently need to try to cover up if any particular aspect of a Canon is not as good. I mean you were the one who wasn't talking about the overall system or the UI or any of that but tried to imply Canon has been making huge and general strides with each model in terms of the sensor and that the sensors are state of the art for detail and DR and color sensitivity.

[quote What about the rest of the system,

I don't know, but you were not talking about the rest of the system in the message that we were all countering.

Quote

from the option to switch to a smaller raw file size

Which isn't really a true RAW and is not all that small for the number of MP it delivers and is useless for maximizing reach without wasting space storing garbage outer areas of the frame. Honestly, I'd rather have the crop options the other brands allow. Full quality cropped RAWs so you retain full everything for reach but don't waste space on excess around the frame edges when you are shooting in distance limited scenarios.

Quote

to certain unique lenses

Yes they do but what does that have to do with your claims that Canon has been making big strides with each body release in terms of MP,DR, color sensitivity when they have not improved any of that for well over half a decade and have gone backwards in terms of color sensitibity? With your making it sound like Canon is right there at the top for DR, MP, color? What else do we expect you to mean you brag on about how Canon is amazing for DR, resolution and color in response seeming to try to counter that Canon sensors are behind?

Quote

to color when photographing humans (not test charts)?

Not every shot has to be of either a typical Caucasian face or of a test chart.

Quote

How is it that some people find a car to be excellent for their needs when it doesn't have the biggest engine, fastest acceleration, heaviest towing capacity, shortest braking, highest headroom, etc.?

Nobody said it wasn't. You started off by claiming that a Toyota Camry has a more powerful engine than a Ferrari F1 car. Sure the Toyota may be fine for most and better for most even but it sure doesn't have a less powerful engine.

Quote

How can anyone be happy with a car that isn't the absolute best in the world in every parameter we choose to measure?

I think we can. I'm not sure you can since you seemed unwilling to admit that any parameter on your equipment might not be the best and when you did you then insisted that the difference could never matter to anyone in any scenario unless they were some slobbering test chart reader. You basically made it sound like any competent photographer, any 'real' photographer would never care. Don't toss rocks if you live in a glass house.

You've twisted my points so much that it's hard to recognize some of the points you're attacking. The fact that Canon sensor tech is too "old" or unsatisfactory for some anonymous people on the internet is not worth this lengthy discussion. I'll just repeat that I find the DR, resolution and color to be amazing, along with other factors, and yes I have seen each generation of cameras improve in image quality. Canon also works for a long list of renowned photographers, as well as for a much longer list of not-renowned but good photographers. They buy Canon gear because it meets their needs, sensor tech and all. It meets their needs — how great is that? And some of them choose Canon for very demanding work. Their work is in magazines, books, ads, fine art, videos, etc., everywhere. Some people treat DR and resolution as the ENTIRE engine, when these are only parts of the engine.

I don't worry a bit about Canon's sensor tech. It's amazing, especially as to resolution, dynamic range and color resolution. No problems with it at all. I'm also very pleased with the improvements from one generation to the next.

Wow, how much does Canon pay you to shill for them?? How is 2.5 stops worse DR, 50% less MP and modestly less color resolution, truly amazing, world beating?? How is not having improved DR or MP for more than half a decade very pleasing sensor improvements from generation to generation (OK at high ISO maybe, but not at low ISO).

Oh boy, better tell everyone with a Nikon D4 to toss their cameras, given that it has 1.3 stops less DR than the D800 and more than 50% less MP. Obviously it's a vastly inferior camera.Now, take that garbage D4 and compare it with the even worse 1Dx, which would you rather have?

Canon sensors are still competent in DR. Maybe not competitive, but they really don't need to be when the rest of the system is so well rounded.If (and I really need to stress "if") the DR of competing sensors goes to something like 20 stops, that would be a big deal, but as is the difference between the best there is and Canons recent offerings is still only about 20%. I don't think they've missed the boat quite yet.

Funny that a post that creates a firestorm of conversation comes from a Sony announcement

I was reading about these cameras on alpharumors.com and you know what they were complaining about? "It's ugly!" Okay, probably not the type of photographers I'd be hanging out with...

One word: Impressive. What can I say bad about it? That it's a Sony product vs. a Canon one. That's pretty much it.

The Fuji X100S. Leaf shutter lens. But fixed. Sony RX1. Full Frame. Also fixed lens. While I shoot mostly with my 50mm, I want options. I think the Sony A99 might be better than the Canon 5D MKIII. But limited lens availability. The pros of the A99 aren't enough to limit lens compatibility.

I've been eyeing that new Zeiss 55mm ever since they announced it a year ago. And my assumptions are right: Impressive. Seeing pictures done with the D800 is truly fantastic. It truly gets close to Medium Format quality. But only in resolution. Tonal Range is still the Medium Format domain. And what I'm hoping the big MP from Canon will challenge. And I think it will. It HAS to if it wants to be relevant.

It all boils back down to what's most important in a photographer's gear bag: lenses. And with the lenses that Sony is coming out with these new cameras is impressive. I don't care about adapters. I'll never use them. I'm a Zeiss follower and extremely happy they will be offering a 55mm f1.8 with this camera. The Zeiss 24-70 f4 could be cool. Though for $1200, it should be f2.8. But not bad.

Canon isn't sweating. They are the 800lb gorilla. Though I think they missed an amazing opportunity. They really slacked on the EOS-M and the mirrorless market. And the A7R looks to be a damn fine high MP camera equally capable with the Nikon D800. At $800 less.

I'm hoping Canon will announce their high MP camera next week at PhotoPlus in NY. Though I doubt it. We all know it will be released within a year. We're just getting too much info on it. And Zeiss wouldn't have released their 55mm f1.4 without the big MP Canon being on the horizon. Though I'm sure they'll get lots of Nikon D800 users lining up for it in the meantime.

As a fashion professional who uses Canon, I still don't see enough to switch. Yet. Lots of things to consider still: lens availability and quality, peripherals (flashes and trigger/receivers). I couldn't see myself having my 5D MK II and one of these Sony's as a backup. At the very minimum, I would need the lens adapter AND remember two different menu systems. Not to mention compatibility issues with peripherals. So I'd have to completely switch. And this system has a long way to go to be considered by serious pros. Once they get peripheral compatibility, this would be an awesome setup. Especially for travel.

If I were a person upgrading to FF or a new pro, I would have to seriously consider these cameras. I would love to get the A7R with the Zeiss 55mm f1.8 as my everyday and travel setup. I'd also use it for events that I shoot for fun. My 5D would only be used for real shoots. And really, would start collecting dust. The A7R I see as a camera I could keep for just these purposes for the next 3 - 5 years. Easy.

Sony is going to OWN the mirrorless market for the next 6 - 9 months with these cameras. They might even make camera of the year by Popular Photography. Wouldn't be surprised.

While I can't even think about buying either of these cameras anytime soon, it opens a whole bunch of possibilities for other manufacturers. It raises the bar for both Nikon and Canon. 2014 WILL be Canon's year. But I think Sony just nailed 2013...